Customs duty exemption linked to end-use certificate must be heard with the connected challenge to avoid inconsistent outcomes.

Entitlement to customs duty exemption under Notification No. 20/99-Cus was linked to production of an end-use certificate issued by the jurisdictional Assistant Commissioner, so the connected challenge to the rejection of that certificate had to be heard with the exemption appeals to avoid inconsistent outcomes. Applying the public notices on allocation and transfer of cases, the tribunal found it appropriate that both matters be listed before the same Bench. The request for joint hearing was accepted, and the matter was directed to be placed before the President of CESTAT for constitution of a Bench at Mumbai or Chennai to hear both appeals together.

---

---

Issues: Whether the appeals concerning customs duty exemption and the connected challenge relating to the end-use certificate should be heard together by the same Bench and placed before the President for constitution of an appropriate Bench.

Analysis: The entitlement to exemption under Notification No. 20/99-Cus was linked to production of an end-use certificate issued by the jurisdictional Assistant Commissioner. Since the application for such certificate had already been rejected and the challenge to that rejection was pending before another Bench, separate hearing of the connected matters could lead to inconsistent results. The existing public notices governing allocation and transfer of cases were considered, and it was found appropriate that both matters be heard together by the same Bench.

Conclusion: The request for joint hearing was accepted, and the matter was directed to be placed before the President, CESTAT for constitution of a Bench at Mumbai or Chennai to hear both appeals together.

---